Re: We need to release 1.0.9 and 1.1.1 with r11211 ASAP

On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 08:31:56PM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote:
> Sorry, my mistake. In hindsight, I really have no idea what went into
> producing that fix. As a user who monitors the list, I guess I was basing
> it on the relatively short time between 1.1 RC3 and RC4.

Yes, considerable development, testing and release planning was handled
on the security list. Which is non-public.

> To me the issue is that 1.1 is a significant new stage for Subversion due
> to FSFS and some of the other nice enhancements. It is a shame to mar the
> new release with a performance regression of this magnitude.

Well we're trying to juggle a number of things here:

* Provide reasonable soak time so people test the release.

* Not needlessly delay a release for months.

* Deal with a security bug and test it with a limited number of users to
prevent accidental/deliberate public disclosure before the fix is ready.

IMHO, the "security fix" was as much of a new feature as a fix for a
security flaw. Protection of meta-data was flat out not implemented.
Maybe we should have soaked 1.1.0-rc4 longer. But all of us were
getting tired of sitting on 1.1.0.

Reality bites.

-- 
Ben Reser <ben@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org